JUDGMENT : ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE, J. 1. This appeal by the husband is filed under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 impugning the judgment and decree dated 07.07.2017 in M.C. No. 8/2016. The petition filed by the wife under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is allowed and marriage solemnised between the parties on 31.08.2014 is dissolved by a decree of divorce. The Family Court awarded Rs. 12.00 lakhs as alimony to the wife. 2. The parties to the proceeding are referred to as the husband and wife. 3. Learned counsel for the wife on instructions submitted that the wife has contracted second marriage on 05.09.2022 after the decree for dissolution of earlier marriage. This being the position, learned counsel for the husband submits that the appeal is confined only to the order of the decree awarding Rs. 12.00 lakhs as alimony. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the husband and the learned counsel appearing for the wife. 5. The admitted pleadings would disclose that the marriage was solemnised on 31.08.2014 and the husband was working in Army. Learned counsel for the husband submitted that the husband and wife lived together only for one month and thereafter, the wife started residing with her parents. The evidence on record would also disclose the fact that at the time of marriage the parents of the husband spent Rs. 4.00 lakhs and they also gave a diamond earring and a gold necklace. The admitted fact is that the wife had filed a complaint under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 in Crl. M.C. No. 111/2015 on the file of the JMFC-II, Mangaluru and in the said proceeding, the Court had initially passed an order on 10.06.2015 granting Rs. 5,000/- per month as maintenance and later same was reduced to Rs. 2,000/- per month in terms of order dated 05.03.2019. It is also stated at the bar that Rs. 1,40,000/- is - paid by the husband pursuant to the order passed by the Court in the proceeding under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 6. Learned counsel for the husband would submit that alimony of Rs. 2,000/- per month in terms of order dated 05.03.2019. It is also stated at the bar that Rs. 1,40,000/- is - paid by the husband pursuant to the order passed by the Court in the proceeding under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 6. Learned counsel for the husband would submit that alimony of Rs. 12.00 lakhs awarded by the Family Court is on higher side and given the fact that the wife stayed with the husband only for a month and also that she has contracted second marriage on 05.09.2022, the alimony payable has to be set-aside. It is also his contention that the fact that the husband has incurred Rs. 4.00 lakhs towards marriage expenses and has given a diamond earring and gold necklace to the wife which should have been taken into consideration by the Family Court and the Family Court ought to have dismissed the claim for alimony. 7. Learned counsel for the wife would submit that the petition seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty is duly established and it is on account of cruel act of the husband, the wife had to stay away and seek a decree for dissolution of marriage. Once her petition is allowed, she is entitled to alimony from the husband as his obligation to maintain the divorced wife continue even after the divorce. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that given the fact that the husband is employed in Army and the permanent alimony is awarded and also considering the fact that the wife was aged 26 years when the petition was filed, the alimony of Rs. 12.00 lakhs awarded is a reasonable sum. 8. This Court has considered the contentions raised at the bar and also perused the records. 9. The admitted factual position is that the husband has incurred Rs. 4.00 lakhs for the marriage and has given diamond earring and gold necklace to the wife and both the ornaments are with the wife. It is also forth coming that the husband has so far paid Rs. 1,40,000/- pursuant to the order passed by the Court in a proceeding under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. However, the subsequent development that the wife has contracted second marriage on 05.09.2022 is also an important factor that is required to be taken into consideration while permanent alimony. 1,40,000/- pursuant to the order passed by the Court in a proceeding under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. However, the subsequent development that the wife has contracted second marriage on 05.09.2022 is also an important factor that is required to be taken into consideration while permanent alimony. The said alimony of Rs. 12.00 lakhs was awarded as an alimony presumably on the premise that wife has to be dependent on alimony for the rest of her life at that time. Since, the wife has contracted second marriage, she is no longer dependent on the alimony of her husband from the first marriage. Subsequent development i.e., second marriage contracted by the wife is certainly an important factor that is to be taken into consideration while quantifying the alimony payable. 10. It is also required to be noticed that the wife was earning Rs. 32,000/- to Rs. 35,000/- per month as seen from Ex.R.6. By taking into consideration all these factors, this Court is of the view that the alimony awarded by the Family Court in favour of the wife has to be reduced to R. 5.00 lakhs. Accordingly, the impugned judgment and decree are partially set-aside. Hence, the following: ORDER: (i) The judgment and decree dated 07.07.2017 passed by the Family Court, D.K. Mangaluru in M.C. No. 08/2016 are partially set-aside and the respondent/wife is held entitled to alimony of Rs. 5.00 lakhs from the appellant/husband. (ii) The appellant/husband shall pay Rs. 5.00 lakhs within two months from the date of this order failing which the alimony of Rs. 5.00 lakhs shall carry 6% interest per annum from this date till payment. (iii) Appeal is allowed-in-part. (iv) No order as to costs.